MalwareBytes latest data-base update

I run MalwareBytes every other day. Today I updated the data-base then ran the scan. When the scan finished MB said it found 705 pups, potentially unwanted programs, 705! Go to details and every file, registry entry, folder etc. that was Advanced System Care had been quarantined! HUH!! Say what!

I ran MB day before yesterday and it did not touch ASC. Now all of a sudden its on MB's hit list. Now I have to reinstall ASC and wonder...if I run MB again will it do the same thing? Suggestions...

MWB has decided it knows better than you what a 'wanted' program is, despite the subjectivity involved. They've been doing the same thing with any Auslogics product for a while now, claiming that Auslogics has engaged in business practices that MWB disapproves of, and you wouldn't want products from companies that MWB disapproves of, would you? Never mind that Auslogics is a Gold Microsoft Partner and rated 4.5 stars by C|Net (for what those are worth).

That was the gist of the response I got when I submitted a 'false positive identification' report to MWB when Premium version 3 started flagging Auslogics Disk Defrag as a PUP. I'm sure it has nothing to do with Auslogics & IObit selling competing anti-malware products. Couldn't be.

MWB has decided it knows better than you what a 'wanted' program is, despite the subjectivity involved. They've been doing the same thing with any Auslogics product for a while now, claiming that Auslogics has engaged in business practices that MWB disapproves of, and you wouldn't want products from companies that MWB disapproves of, would you? Never mind that Auslogics is a Gold Microsoft Partner and rated 4.5 stars by C|Net (for what those are worth).

That was the gist of the response I got when I submitted a 'false positive identification' report to MWB when Premium version 3 started flagging Auslogics Disk Defrag as a PUP. I'm sure it has nothing to do with Auslogics & IObit selling competing anti-malware products. Couldn't be.

At least they make it relatively easy to whitelist things.

MalwareBytes AntiMalware does its job based on how it's configured. By default PUPs and PUMs are treated as malware. As a subscriber I want the company to aggressively determine what is and isn't a PUP and implement that in its signatures. Anyone who prefers to have control over removal can change the default setting to "warn user". I can't comment on Advanced System Care specifically, but there are a lot of "grey-ware" programs that have crossed the line and should be removed IMHO. But, as you say, any application can be white-listed regardless.

MWB has decided it knows better than you what a 'wanted' program is, despite the subjectivity involved. They've been doing the same thing with any Auslogics product for a while now, claiming that Auslogics has engaged in business practices that MWB disapproves of, and you wouldn't want products from companies that MWB disapproves of, would you? Never mind that Auslogics is a Gold Microsoft Partner and rated 4.5 stars by C|Net (for what those are worth).

And MS doesn't engage in undesirable business practices, as well?

They all live in glass houses, my friend...and stones are all too available.

As a subscriber I want the company to aggressively determine what is and isn't a PUP and implement that in its signatures.

Me, too, Vic. The thing is MWB flags it not because the application itself is a problem or PUP (MWB admitted so in their response to me), but because Auslogics (allegedly) does what they consider to be 'shady' things elsewhere. Maybe they should add a new category with the acronym PUC for Potentially Unwanted Company.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still using MWB and have paid for the Premium version. I just find it interesting how these companies 'compete' in subtle ways.

Based on flagging/deleting ASC...a proggy I'm entirely happy [read - confident] to run on every system I own.

I don't take kindly to programs that decide FOR ME what I can or cannot use.

That makes MWB very much a PUP.

No different to those wonderful false-positives that Norton loves to always get wrong...to the point where either the insulted companies should sue...or advertise that Norton is ALSO a 'PUP' [and not just a 'POS']...

You understand the difference between stopping virii and malware and flagging competing commercial software as unwanted. I consider the latter just as 'shady' as the alleged activities MWB disapproves of in others.

I use Malwarebytes Pro. I have no issues with it. It can be configured on how it handles PUPs to let the end user decide the correct action.

With regard to software such as Advanced System Care, there are competing opinions as to the relative safety of these products since they directly alter the Registry (they call it Cleaning, how benign).

I would rather educate myself a bit in choosing correct system settings that make sense for my use of my computer than click a button and rely on a software product to do it all for me.

I consider these kind of software products the equivalent of take two pills swallowed with a Big Gulp of Vitamin Enhanced Energy Water and make all the troubles go away mentality so current today.

And while I hear the complaint MWB goes too far in this thread, in my every day use and experience it does not.

MWB does not solely select a software for being on the PUP list, rather its end users provide feedback to MWB about troublesome products.

Maybe ASC has de-installation issues and likes to pop-up notices it needs to be re-installed (nag flagging and the like). I would not know the specifics of why it made it to MWB's PUP list but I am sure that decision was based on user feedback.

MWB does not solely select a software for being on the PUP list, rather its end users provide feedback to MWB about troublesome products.

I'd be willing to accept that very reasonable assumption if MWB hadn't told me otherwise. Auslogics Disk Defrag is not a 'troublesome product'. It's been 'PUP'd' because all Auslogics software has been 'PUP'd' based on their knowledge of certain (alleged) business practices of Auslogics, unrelated to the functionality of the defrag application, that MWB considers problematic. I will certainly grant that some of that knowledge likely came from MWB user feedback. The free products of both Auslogics and IObit can be a tad annoying with upgrade prompts & additional software offers, but they are easily ignored/dismissed and acceptable as their 'cost'.

And let me reiterate: I have purchased, use and trust MWB to do its job and I've simply whitelisted Auslogics Disk Defrag.

I would rather educate myself a bit in choosing correct system settings that make sense for my use of my computer than click a button and rely on a software product to do it all for me.

I'm 'educated' and am still happy to let ASC do it all for me....the only option not 'ticked' is the 'registry defrag' as that is pretty much useless and worthless in modern OS systems.

As I said, all my 6 machines of varying spec use it...even this one that cost me a bucket load to build.

It's always 'entertaining' when competing software flags the other as 'bad'.

Now, REAL software, like Kaspersky Total Security can and does remind you from time to time that you have 'unused' software that you may like to review and/or remove....but it does not and will not be so presumptuous as to simply delete it first and tell you later.

....and if this is all about user feedback defining something as a 'PUP'...what if the 'users' are utter morons....and you are in a case of the blind leading the blind?

Question about the driver updater...I used it once and it 'updated' what it said were outdated drivers. So I let it update them, big mistake. I had to roll back the graphics driver as it totally screwed it up. Been leery of it ever since.

In addition to malicious software detection and elimination, Malwarebytes 3.0 also detects and acts upon two classes of non-malware. These are Potentially Unwanted Programs (PUP's) and Potentially Unwanted Modifications (PUM's). In many cases, PUP's appear in the form of toolbars and other application software which are installed on your computer as part of a bundle. You may have asked for one application, and it came with a second application that was not mentioned, or was mentioned, but you did not uncheck the checkbox next to it to prevent it from being installed at the same time. You may also want and use the PUP. We do not judge the merit of the program or its usability. We do offer a method of removing it if you choose to.

PUM's are a bit different. These are modifications that are typically related to the Windows registry. As a user you will generally not be making changes to the registry that would qualify as a PUM, though the possibility does exist. Because it does, we allow you to define your own rules when it comes to how they are treated. With regard to both types of modifications, we provide three handling methods. These are:

Ignore detections: Malwarebytes will not act on detection, nor will you be alerted.

Warn user: You will be alerted to the detection, and you may choose to ignore it, create an exclusion, or treat it as malware.

Treat detections as malware: The detection will be treated as malware, and corrective actions will occur.

While PUP's and PUM's are both handled in the same manner, each is handled according to separate guidelines which you specify.

Its up to you to tell it what to do with any software identified as a PUP. I have both of these set to Warn user.

And, let's not forget False Positives do happen with all such software.